Some people don't seem to understand that the 1st Amendment protects us against censorship by the government. There is no such thing as "corporate censorship". If the owner of a radio station doesn't want to play your music, it's not censorship; rather, it is the epitome of free speech: the radio station owner has the right to choose what speech he or she facilitates. It's astonishing to me that Senator John McCain thinks there is censorship involved because a set of radio stations decided not to play the Dixie Chicks' music.

While Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he disagreed with Maines' sentiment, the fact that giant radio groups could ban a group's music because of a political statement was an ``incredible, incredible act'' that serves as an example of how radio industry consolidation is causing the ``erosion of the First Amendment.''

What troubled McCain and several of the other senators is not that a decision was made to keep the band off the air but rather that the decision was made in a corporate headquarters miles away from the station to stop playing the group's music.

Wait, so, is McCain upset because the Chicks' music wasn't played? He seems to imply that with his fallacious invocation of the 1st Amendment. But then in the next paragraph it sounds like what he is really objecting to are ordinary property rights. It's troubling to him that the owners and/or managers of the radio station don't live close to the station itself? That's like objecting to the color McCain paints his house in Arizona because he spends most of his time in Washington DC. He owns it, he can paint it whatever color he wants, and his geographical location is completely and entirely irrelevant.

Just for clarification: the 1st Amendment gives you the right to speak, but not the right to be heard. No one can stop you from saying whatever you want, but no one is required to listen or facilitate your speech. I haven't watched any of Michael Moore's drivel or read any of his nonsense, but that doesn't mean I'm censoring him. Similarly, Glenn Reynolds hasn't linked to any of my brilliant and insightful essays, but that doesn't mean he's censoring me -- it just means he's a cruel, selfish person.

Comments

What Is Censorship?

Some people don't seem to understand that the 1st Amendment protects us against censorship by the government. There is no such thing as \"corporate censorship\". If the owner of a radio station doesn't want to play your music, it's not censorship; rather, it is the epitome of free speech: the radio station owner has the right to choose what speech he or she facilitates. It's astonishing to me that Senator John McCain thinks there is censorship involved because a set of radio stations decided not to play the Dixie Chicks' music.

While Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., said he disagreed with Maines' sentiment, the fact that giant radio groups could ban a group's music because of a political statement was an ``incredible, incredible act'' that serves as an example of how radio industry consolidation is causing the ``erosion of the First Amendment.''\n\nWhat troubled McCain and several of the other senators is not that a decision was made to keep the band off the air but rather that the decision was made in a corporate headquarters miles away from the station to stop playing the group's music.

Wait, so, is McCain upset because the Chicks' music wasn't played? He seems to imply that with his fallacious invocation of the 1st Amendment. But then in the next paragraph it sounds like what he is really objecting to are ordinary property rights. It's troubling to him that the owners and/or managers of the radio station don't live close to the station itself? That's like objecting to the color McCain paints his house in Arizona because he spends most of his time in Washington DC. He owns it, he can paint it whatever color he wants, and his geographical location is completely and entirely irrelevant.\n\nJust for clarification: the 1st Amendment gives you the right to speak, but not the right to be heard. No one can stop you from saying whatever you want, but no one is required to listen or facilitate your speech. I haven't watched any of Michael Moore's drivel or read any of his nonsense, but that doesn't mean I'm censoring him. Similarly, Glenn Reynolds hasn't linked to any of my brilliant and insightful essays, but that doesn't mean he's censoring me -- it just means he's a cruel, selfish person.